On Wednesday, 20 July 2016 at 16:08:26 UTC, pineapple wrote:
Pardon my being scatterbrained (and there not being an "edit post" function) - you're referring to phobos not considering char[] and wchar[] to have random access? The reason they are not considered to have random access is because they are auto-decoded by other functions that handle them, and the auto-decoding makes random access inefficient. Not because shuffleRandom itself auto-decodes them.
The relevant lines I quoted from the docs above explain quite clearly that it's because they are multi-byte formats. Indexing them is not inefficient, it simply makes no sense. What does it mean to take the value at index i when it is part of a multi-byte sequence that continues at index i+1? Auto-decoding has nothing to do with it.
